Thanks for the input--sorry I can't help you remember the name of the short story, but maybe the transactive memory of the class can help you out even if Google didn't. I agree with you on everything you've mentioned and I think that this kind of disconnect between humanity and technology is something that merits more thought--especially with it comes to personal identity.

I ironically was about to post on this draft myself before you posted your comments, so I apologize if what follows doesn't directly address your points, though it still might be of interest to you/I'd like to know people's opinions on the matter.

In the time since I wrote this paper, I’ve continued researching the topic, which has led me to focus more specifically on the relationship between the creative mind and the internet. I want to keep editing my paper, but I’m not sure how to integrate all this new information in without completely rewriting the entire thing, so I thought I’d just brainstorm a little until I get more feedback. I just picked up Nicholas Carr’s 2010 book The Shallows, which is an extension of his 2009 Atlantic cover piece “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”an article I’m sure many of us have already read.

Jim Holt’s review of The Shallows is actually what convinced me to read the book itself, and it’s definitely worth a look for a summary of Carr’s option as well as some criticism. Carr’s main point is that computers and access to the internet not only change the way the human mind works, but that the changes lead to negative consequences.

Initially, I absolutely agreed. I grew up in a small town flanked by farmland and Amish communities and I always idolized the peace that came with their unadorned lifestyle. Now I take notes in class on my MacBook? air while I have four or five other applications open. Still, I’ve always preferred unhurriedly reading page to page out of a book to the rapid pace of scrolling a computer screen or using ctrl-f to locate a certain phrase. Holt cites Sven Birkeris’s argument that computers destroy the human capacity for deep reading—something that I’ve absolutely noticed in my own life when multitasking breaks my concentration.

Carr focuses on these negative aspects of technology, but his critics argue that he does not take enough time to weigh the positive effects computers and the internet have on the brain. The studies Holt mentions stress that running Google searches helps keep elderly minds sharp and that video games help children pay attention to multiple things at once. Obviously there is a tradeoff. Humans gain speed and efficiency while running the risk of losing the ability to concentrate deeply on one thing and to think creatively.

I remain undecided on the issue. Yes, it bothers me that the internet changes how we think and that it may encourage shallower thinking, but at the same time I think it is too extreme to say that the internet somehow robs us of our creativity. It is an individual choice to concentrate while reading or disable ones Facebook account. Hell, I’m even drafting this blurb on a legal pad so I’m not distracted by my email, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say it’s my email’s fault if I happen to glance at it.

The science and history involved in this whole debate are both fascinating. Neuroplasticity studies with little doubt confirm that our brains adapt to the way we feed them information. History tells the age-old story of intellectual resistance toward manuscripts, printing presses, photographs and typewriters—resistance that ultimately lost out when society changed. If the mind comes prepackaged with malleable characteristics that allow us to change how we think, then adapting to technology can’t be completely unnatural. And if we’re worried about losing the capacity to “deep think,” isn’t that concern something each person can combat on an individual level? Or is mob mentality too powerful to keep us from ignoring our computers and phones?

-- AnneFox - 28 Jun 2012